A wedge between the alliance: “citizens”
Despite all the displays of power by the MHP and AKP, the segment they have managed to convince on the economy and the resolution process remains at 15 per cent. Differences of opinion on the course to be followed are also causing the gap to widen.
The People's Alliance (Cumhur İttifakı) been at the centre of Turkish politics since 2018. During this period, the MHP and AKP have built a regime they call the Presidential Government System, which will only survive through their partnership. Bahçeli and Erdoğan have managed to carry this process, which has plunged the country into a dark tunnel, to the present day with great harmony.
Any issue within the alliance that could become a crisis has been swept under the carpet and postponed until now through private conversations and interventions by the pair.
Over the last few weeks, another level has developed in the relationship. Party leaders and strategists seem to be trying to show their differences rather than their unity. Based on the evidence we have, it is impossible to say definitively whether this is a division of labour or a deepening of ideological differences.
However, when we look at recent events, it is possible to envisage a scenario for the future that is not at all far-fetched.
NEW SITUATION: TENSION-FILLED RELATIONSHIP
The People's Alliance is still a mutual necessity for both parties. The AKP maintains its majority in parliament with the support of the MHP. The MHP, in turn, continues to exert its political influence by being part of the regime. But this necessity has not prevented tension between the two.
The source of the latest tension is said to be the AKP's resistance to Bahçeli's ‘Terror-Free Turkey’ project. Yet, the process, which has gone through different stages over the past year or so, had somehow been turned into a joint project. Whatever happened, it happened mostly before Erdoğan's visit to the US.
A series of ‘black money’ operations and Bahçeli's counter-statements were enough to draw attention to the contradictions within the alliance. Then, the TRÇ (Turkey-Russia-China) initiative, which came before the Erdoğan-Trump meeting, led to the relationship being put on the table as a whole.
Bahçeli's outbursts following the TRNC election results, police appointments, his ‘enough is enough’ stance on operations against the CHP, the Kenan Tekdağ incident, and Bahçeli's repeated calls that bounced off the Palace walls and fell to the ground, unanswered, were added to this picture.
Far from closing the rift, the leak grew larger each time.
VOICE OF THE STREET BOOSTED PANIC
MHP leader Bahçeli said the following in a speech he made at the Assembly podium on 5 November 2024, about a year ago:
“If terrorism is eradicated from our lives, if a decisive blow is struck against the inflation monster, if Turkey reaches the pinnacle of political and economic stability, wouldn’t the re-election of our President, Mr Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, be a natural and correct choice?”
Bahçeli addressed President Erdoğan, setting two fundamental conditions for “success”: the resolution process and the economy.
Looking back, although steps were attempted in these two areas, the public already considered them a failure. KONDA's latest public opinion poll shows that both Kurds and Turks are absolutely convinced that the regime cannot resolve the Kurdish issue.
As of September, only 12 per cent believed that ‘the government will resolve the Kurdish issue.’
Strangely enough, the percentage of those who believe that ‘the economy is improving’ is very close to this figure, at 15 per cent.
Despite all the noisy displays of power by the MHP and AKP, the social segment they have managed to convince on two fundamental issues remains only 15%.
This figure is causing unease not only in the MHP but also in the AKP. Differences of opinion on the path being followed are increasingly leading to an emotional disconnect.
Voter behaviour is not the only criterion for the two parties; signs of disintegration are also emerging within their core cadres.
The Cyprus, PKK and Israel issues have served as a ‘glue’ holding the Turkish right together for years. It is worth evaluating the reaction from the MHP following Tufan Erhürman's victory in the TRNC elections from this perspective.
How can an MHP that has abandoned everything it has defended until now convince anyone?
WHO DIDN'T ATTEND, AND WHY?
The Republic reception hosted by Erdoğan at Beştepe led to renewed discussion of the MHP–AKP and DEM–AKP relationships.
Devlet Bahçeli was absent from both Anıtkabir and Beştepe. This was interpreted as a ‘Cyprus stance’.
The DEM Party, perhaps out of habit, was not even invited to Beştepe. Despite this, the statement from DEM was that ‘it is not a situation that will affect the process’.
Approximately 12 hours after this incident, Hakan Fidan and Yılmaz Tunç attended the commission and provided information. Numan Kurtulmuş said, ‘We have reached the report writing stage.’ On the same day, Erdoğan held a meeting with the İmralı delegation. Kandil explained the reasons for withdrawing from Turkey.
Looking at all these developments, it really seems as if everything is progressing as desired. So where is the problem? Clearly, it is useful to look once again at KONDA's research. The public's stance against the regime and its policies is pushing everyone to think twice about taking action.
ONCE AGAIN BAHÇELİ?
MHP leader Devlet Bahçeli is known for his statements and moves at critical junctures for the country.
It was largely these moves that brought the AKP to regime and kept it there. Following the recent increase in tension between the AKP and the MHP, the question ‘Will Bahçeli step in once again?’ came to mind.
The infighting within the regime that has emerged in recent days indicates that the distance between them is increasing daily.
Although this distance does not yet signal a break, it shows that politics will evolve into a more tense, internally competitive alliance in the coming period. Whether this tension deepens and leads the country to early elections depends on the resolve shown by the opposition and the path it chooses to follow.
It is now clear that a regime cannot convince the public; this has become evident. The opposition, meanwhile, must prove its maturity and win over the people.
Politics is stuck precisely at this point.
Note: This article is translated from the original article titled Muhalefet ‘direniş’, halk ‘değişim’ istedikçe cumhur gerildi: İttifakın arasına ‘yurttaş’ kaması, published in BirGün newspaper on 31 October 2025.
